Agenglish 1-45

Joint Quality
Joint QualityManagement in the

Management in the Supply
Supply
Chain
Chain
AutomotiveSPICE®
Automotive SPICE®
Guidelines
Guidelines
Process assessmentusing
Process assessment usingAutomotive
Automotive SPICE
SPICE in in thedevelopment
the developmentof of sof
softw
1st. edition, September 2017
第一名。版，2017 年 9 月
Quality Management in the Automotive Industry
汽车行业的质量管理
Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um 11:33
VDA-QMC 互联网门户 am 09.06.2021 um 11:33
Nur zur internen Verwendung für Yanfeng US Automotive bestimmt.

我们在延锋美国汽车展览会上获得了国际冠军。
Automotive SPICE®
汽车香料
Guidelines
指导方针
Process assessment using Automotive SPICE in the

development of software-based systems.
在基于软件的系统开发中使用 Automotive SPICE 进行过
程评估。

1st. edition, September 2017
第一名。版，2017 年 9 月
Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)

VDA 汽车工业联合会
German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA)
德国汽车工业协会(VDA)
Automotive SPICE®
汽车香料
is a registered trademark of Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)
是 Verband der automobil industrie e . v .(VDA)的注册商标

ISSN 0943-9412
国际刊号 0943-9412
Printed: December 2017
印刷时间:2017 年 12 月
Copyright 2017 by
版权所有 2017 作者
Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)

Qualitätsmanagement-Center (QMC)
10117 Berlin, Behrenstraße 35
VDA 汽车工业有限公司质量管理中心(QMC ),
10117 柏林，behrenstrae 35
Germany
德国
Printing house:
印刷厂:
Henrich Druck + Medien GmbH
亨利克·德鲁克医疗有限公司
Schwanheimer Straße 110, 60528 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
德国法兰克福市施万海默大街 110 号，邮编:60528
Printed on chlorine-free bleached paper

印刷在无氯漂白纸上

Non-binding VDA standard recommendation
不具约束力的 VDA 标准建议
The Association of the German Automotive Industry (VDA) recommends its
members to apply the following standard for the implementation and
maintenance of quality management systems.
德国汽车工业协会(VDA)建议其成员采用以下标准来实施和维护质量管理体
系。
Exclusion of liability
责任免除
VDA volumes are recommendations available for general use. Anyone ap-
plying them is responsible for ensuring that they are used correctly in each
case.
VDA 卷是可供一般使用的建议。任何使用它们的人都有责任确保在每种情况
下正确使用它们。
This VDA volume takes into account state of the art technology, current at
the time of issue. Implementation of VDA recommendations relieves no one
of responsibility for their own actions. In this respect everyone acts at their
own risk. The VDA and those involved in VDA recommendations shall bear
no liability.
这一 VDA 卷考虑到最先进的技术，目前在发行时。执行 VDA 建议并不能免除
任何人对自己行动的责任。在这方面，每个人都要自担风险。 VDA 和那些参
与 VDA 建议的国家不承担任何责任。
If during the use of VDA recommendations, errors or the possibility of mis-
interpretation are found, it is requested that these be notified to the VDA
immediately so that any possible faults can be corrected.
如果在使用 VDA 建议的过程中，发现错误或误解的可能性，请立即通知
VDA，以便纠正任何可能的错误。
Copyright
版权
Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom I
This document and all of its constituent parts are subject to copyright. Use
outside of the strict limits of copyright law without the consent of the VDA is
prohibited; such use constitutes a criminal offense.
本文档及其所有组成部分都受版权保护。未经 VDA 同意，禁止在版权法的严
格限制之外使用；这种使用构成刑事犯罪。
This applies in particular to copying, translation, microfilming, and storing or
processing in electronic systems.
这尤其适用于复印、翻译、缩微拍摄以及电子系统中的存储或处理。
All rights reserved. Unless specified otherwise, it is prohibited to reproduce
this document, in part or in full, to store this document electronically or by
any other means, or to transmit, photocopy, or record this document in any
way without prior written consent by the publisher.
保留所有权利。除非另有规定，否则未经出版者事先书面同意，禁止部分或
全部复制本文档，禁止以电子方式或任何其他方式存储本文档，禁止以任何
方式传输、影印或记录本文档。

Preface
前言
The predominant and continually increasing number of innovative vehicle
functions related to user-friendliness, safety, security and the protection of
the environment by economic efficiency can only be achieved by the intro-
duction of complex and highly-networked software systems.
只有通过引入复杂且高度网络化的软件系统，才能实现与用户友好性、安全
性、安全性以及通过经济效率保护环境相关的主要且不断增加的创新车辆功
能。
Market demands require permanent innovations with increasing complexity
within shorter time frames. Together with rising demand for reliability, the
shorter development periods make it essential to improve the software de-
velopment processes and methods for product creation so as to ensure the
development and manufacturing of products in time and in the quality which
satisfies customer’s expectations.
市场需求要求在更短的时间内不断创新，复杂性不断增加。随着对可靠性要
求的提高，开发周期的缩短使得改进软件开发过程和产品创新方法变得至关
重要，从而确保产品的开发和制造及时且质量满足客户的期望。
In 2005 the Automotive Special Interest Group published the automotive
domain specific “Automotive SPICE Process Assessment Model” and “Au-
tomotive SPICE Process Reference Model” derived from the ISO/IEC
15504 International Standard for Process Assessments.
2005 年，汽车特别兴趣小组发布了汽车领域特有的“汽车 SPICE 过程评估模
型”和“汽车 SPICE 过程参考模型”,它们源自 ISO/IEC 15504 过程评估国际
标准。
Between 2012 and 2015 the “Automotive SPICE Process Assessment
Model” Version 2.5 and “Automotive SPICE Process Reference Model”
Version 4.5 was significantly reworked by the VDA QMC working group 13.
This was based on a mandate of the VDA Quality management board to
take appropriate steps to improve the quality and comparability of assess-
ment results.
从 2012 年到 2015 年，VDA QMC 工作组 13 对“汽车 SPICE 过程评估模型”2.5
版和“汽车 SPICE 过程参考模型”4.5 版进行了重大修改。这是基于 VDA 质
量管理委员会的一项授权，即采取适当措施提高评估结果的质量和可比性。
I Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

In July 2015 the Automotive SPICE process reference and assessment
model version 3.0 was released in a combined document that is improved
regarding the structure of the processes with added clarifications, additional
concepts and by removing inconsistencies. A version 3.1 with minor up-
dates will be available with the publication of this document.
2015 年 7 月，汽车 SPICE 流程参考和评估模型 3.0 版在一份合并文档中发
布，该文档在流程结构方面进行了改进，增加了说明和概念，并消除了不一
致之处。随着本文档的发布，3.1 版将有少量更新。
The “Automotive SPICE Process Assessment Model” is increasingly used
within the global automotive industry for the objective evaluation of pro-
cesses and the subsequent improvement of processes at project and or-
ganization level. The objective in drawing up this document was to support
the interpretation and application of the model for the automotive industry
and to provide guidance and recommendations to increase the comparabil-
ity of assessments results.
“汽车 SPICE 流程评估模型”在全球汽车行业内越来越多地用于流程的客观
评估以及项目和组织层面的后续流程改进。起草本文件的目的是支持汽车行
业模型的解释和应用，并为提高评估结果的可比性提供指导和建议。

Acknowledgements
承认
Our thanks go to the following companies, in particular to the employees
involved, for their participation in the preparation of this document:
我们感谢以下公司，特别是参与编写本文件的员工:
 BMW AG
 宝马股份公司
 Robert Bosch GmbH
 罗伯特·博世有限公司
 Brose Fahrzeugteile GmbH & Co. KG
 Brose Fahrzeugteile 两合公司
 Continental AG
 大陆股份公司
 Daimler AG
 戴姆勒股份公司
 Ford Motor Company
 福特汽车公司
 Knorr Bremse GmbH
 克诺尔有限公司
 Kugler Maag CIE GmbH
 库格勒·马格有限公司
 Schaeffler AG
 舍弗勒股份公司
 Volkswagen AG
 大众汽车公司
 ZF Friedrichshafen AG
 ZF 弗里德里希港股份公司
Thanks are also due to all who have provided suggestions for improvement
as well as those organizations represented in the editorial circle.
也要感谢所有提出改进建议的人以及编辑圈里的组织。

Content
内容
Terms and glossary 1

Introduction 5
Document scope 7
Relation to ISO/IEC 330xx series 7
Relation to Automotive SPICE 8
Part 1: Interpretation and rating guidelines 11
1 Application of interpretation and rating guidelines 11
1.1 Overview 11
1.2 Assessment scope 12
1.3 General rating practice 20
1.4 Application of rating rules and recommendations 25
2 Key concepts and overall guidelines 34
2.1 Specific terms used in base practices 34
2.1.1 Traceability and consistency 34
2.1.2 Summarize and communicate 42
2.1.3 Verification criteria 47
2.1.4 Strategy and plan 49
2.2 Application in specific environments 54
2.2.1 Model based development 54
2.2.2 Agile environments 58
2.2.3 Distributed development 63
2.2.4 Management of third-party software 65
2.2.5 Management of platform and legacy software 71
2.2.6 Application parameters 74
3 Rating guidelines on process performance (level 1) 82
3.1 ACQ.4 Supplier Monitoring 82
3.2 SYS.2 System Requirements Analysis 87
Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom V

3.3 SYS.3 System Architectural Design 95
Terms and glossary 1

Introduction 5
Document scope 7
Relation to ISO/IEC 330xx series 7
Relation to Automotive SPICE 8
Part 1: Interpretation and rating guidelines 11
4 Application of interpretation and rating guidelines 11
4.1 Overview 11
4.2 Assessment scope 12
4.3 General rating practice 20
4.4 Application of rating rules and recommendations 25
5 Key concepts and overall guidelines 34
5.1 Specific terms used in base practices 34
5.1.1 Traceability and consistency 34
5.1.2 Summarize and communicate 42
5.1.3 Verification criteria 47
5.1.4 Strategy and plan 49
5.2 Application in specific environments 54
5.2.1 Model based development 54
5.2.2 Agile environments 58
5.2.3 Distributed development 63
5.2.4 Management of third-party software 65
5.2.5 Management of platform and legacy software 71
5.2.6 Application parameters 74
6 Rating guidelines on process performance (level 1) 82
6.1 ACQ.4 Supplier Monitoring 82
6.2 SYS.2 System Requirements Analysis 87
6.3 SYS.3 System Architectural Design 95

3.4 SYS.4 System Integration and Integration Test 104
3.5 SYS.5 System Qualification Test 112
3.6 SWE.1 Software Requirements Analysis 119
3.7 SWE.2 Software Architectural Design 126
3.8 SWE.3 Software Detailed Design and Unit Construction 135
3.9 SWE.4 Software Unit Verification 144
3.10 SWE.5 Software Integration and Integration Test 150
3.11 SWE.6 Software Qualification Test 158
3.12 SUP.1 Quality Assurance 165
3.13 SUP.8 Configuration Management 173
3.14 SUP.9 Problem Resolution Management 181
3.15 SUP.10 Change Request Management 188
3.16 MAN.3 Project Management 197
4 Rating guidelines on process capability level 2 211
4.1 Dependency between process attributes of level 1 and 2 212
4.2 Performance Management (PA 2.1) 213
4.3 Work Product Management (PA 2.2) 226
5.1 Process Definition (PA 3.1) 235
5.2 Process Deployment (PA 3.2) 239
5.3 Rating consistency 243
Part 2: Guidelines for performing the assessment 248
6 Documented assessment process 249
6.1 Introduction 249
6.2 Assessment input and output 250
6.3 Parties and roles involved in the assessment 252
6.4 Assessment activities 254
7 Improvement process 268
7.2 Improvement activities 268
VI Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom
VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

3.4 SYS.4 System Integration and Integration Test 104
3.5 SYS.5 System Qualification Test 112
3.6 SWE.1 Software Requirements Analysis 119
3.7 SWE.2 Software Architectural Design 126
3.8 SWE.3 Software Detailed Design and Unit Construction 135
3.9 SWE.4 Software Unit Verification 144
3.10 SWE.5 Software Integration and Integration Test 150
3.11 SWE.6 Software Qualification Test 158
3.12 SUP.1 Quality Assurance 165
3.13 SUP.8 Configuration Management 173
3.14 SUP.9 Problem Resolution Management 181
3.15 SUP.10 Change Request Management 188
3.16 MAN.3 Project Management 197
4.1 Dependency between process attributes of level 1 and 212
2
4.2 Performance Management (PA 2.1) 213
4.3 Work Product Management (PA 2.2) 226
5.1 Process Definition (PA 3.1) 235
5.2 Process Deployment (PA 3.2) 239
5.3 Rating consistency 243
Part Guidelines for performing the assessment 248
2:
6 Documented assessment process 249
6.2 Assessment input and output 250
6.3 Parties and roles involved in the assessment 252
6.4 Assessment activities 254
7 Improvement process 268
7.2 Improvement activities 268

五 Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

8 Recommendations for performing an assessment 274
9 Recommendations for performing an assessment 274
9.1 Assessment results 274
9.2 Assessment results 274
9.3 Validity of assessments 274
9.4 Validity of assessments 274
9.5 Performing an assessment 276
9.6 Performing an assessment 276
9.7 Assessment report 277
9.8 Assessment report 277
10 Requirements relating to assessor qualification 283
11 Requirements relating to assessor qualification 283
11.1 Requirements for lead assessors 283
11.2 Requirements for lead assessors 283
11.3 Requirements for non-lead assessors 284
11.4 Requirements for non-lead assessors 284
ANNEX: Documentation of the assessment scope 285
ANNEX: Documentation of the assessment scope 285
Bibliography 298
Bibliography 298

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt
vom
Dokument wurde bereitgestellt

vom

VII
罗马数字 7

VIII Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom
第八届世界妇女大会

Terms and glossary
术语和词汇表
In the following, definitions of terms used in the present volume are
provided. When applicable, a citation of the definition provided in the
ISO/IEC330xx process assessment series of standards is given in italic
letters.
下文提供了本卷中所用术语的定义。适用时，ISO/xx 过程评估系列标准中定
义的引用以斜体给出。
Please refer to ISO/IEC 33001:2015 for a full glossary of the terms used
the ISO/IEC 330xx series [ISO33001].
请参考 ISO/IEC 33001:2015，了解 ISO/genesin xx 系列[ISO33001]中使用
的完整术语表。
Term Definition
Assessing The organization which performs the assessment. Usually the lead as-
organization sessor and other assessment team members are part of the assessing
organization.
Assessment log The formal documentation of the execution of an assessment drawn

up by the assessor. The assessment log is the evidence of the
assessor’s assessment activities and is provided to the certification
body.
Assessment scope Definition of the boundaries of the assessment, provided as part of the
assessment input, encompassing the boundaries of the organizational
unit for the assessment, the processes to be included, the quality level
for each process to be assessed, and the context within which the pro-
cesses operate.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.8]
Assessment Individual or entity, internal or external to the organizational unit being

sponsor assessed, who requires the assessment to be performed and
provides financial or other resources to carry it out.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.9]
Assessment team One or more individuals who jointly perform a process assessment.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.10]
Assessor Individual who participates in the rating of process attributes.

→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.11]

Audit A systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining
audit evidence [records, statements of fact or other information which
are relevant and verifiable] and evaluating it objectively to determine
the extent to which the audit criteria [set of policies, procedures or re-
quirements] are fulfilled.
→ [ISO 19011]
学期定义
评估机构执行评估的组织。通常，首席评估员和其他评估小组成员是评估组织的
一部分。
评估日志由评估员起草的执行评估的正式文件。评估日志是评估员评估活动的证
据，提供给认证机构。
评估范围评估范围的定义，作为评估输入的一部分，包括评估组织单位的范围、
要包括的过程、要评估的每个过程的质量水平以及过程运行的环境。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.8]
评估发起人被评估组织单位内部或外部的个人或实体，要求进行评估并提供进行评
估的财政或其他资源。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.9]
评估小组共同执行过程评估的一个或多个个人。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.10]
评估员参与流程属性评级的个人。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.11]
审计一个系统的、独立的和记录在案的过程，用于获取审计证据[相关的和
可证实的记录、事实陈述或其他信息]，并对其进行客观评估，以确定
审计标准[一套政策、程序或要求]的满足程度。
→ [ISO 19011]

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom 1
dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom 1

Term Definition
Automotive SPICE A process assessment and reference model conformant to the re-
quirements of ISO/IEC 33002:2015. It is primarily addressing the de-
velopment of embedded software-based systems within the automotive
domain. It can be downloaded free of charge on
www.automotivespice.com.
AUTOSAR AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture: an initiative by the automo-

tive industry for standardization of software in electronic control units
(www.autosar.org).
AUTOSAR domains Categories used to classify electronic control units by their area of ap-
plication, e.g. chassis, powertrain, telematics, body.
Process capability A characterization of the ability of a process to meet current or project-

ed business goals.
Capability level Point on a scale of achievement of the process capability derived from
the process attribute ratings for an assessed process.
Certification body A central body which administrates the certification information of the
trained assessors and classifies the trained assessors by their qualifi-
cations and practical experience according to a certification scheme.
Certification scheme A set of rules and procedures used by a certification body to certify as-
sessors.
Evidence Artifact or information reflecting practice performance. Evidence are

used during assessment to understand process performance and can
be documents, oral information, data or information from tools or other
sources.
Evidence repository Repository for storing evidences which have been obtained.
Feedback presenta- A process step at the end of the assessment, when the assessment
tion team provides early feedback on the results of the assessment. It usu-
ally covers the main strengths and potential improvements. The set of
provisional process capability profiles is also presented if appropriate.
Findings The evaluations documented by assessors regarding strengths and po-

tential improvements of the organizational unit which was evaluated,
based on verbal affirmations from interviews and work products pre-
sented (→Evidence).
学期定义

汽车香料符合 ISO/IEC 33002:2015 要求的过程评估和参考模型。它主要致力于汽
车领域嵌入式软件系统的开发。它可以在以下网站免费下载
www.automotivespice.com.
AUTOSAR 汽车开放系统架构:汽车行业为电子控制单元软件标准化提出的倡
议。
AUTOSAR 域用于根据电子控制单元的应用领域对其进行分类的类别，例如底盘、
动力系统、远程信息处理和车身。
工序能力过程满足当前或计划的业务目标的能力的表征。
能力水平从被评估过程的过程属性评级中得出的过程能力成就等级上的一点。
认证机构一个中央机构，负责管理经过培训的评估员的认证信息，并根据认证
计划，根据他们的资格和实践经验对经过培训的评估员进行分类。
认证方案认证机构用来认证评估者的一套规则和程序。
证据反映实践表现的人工制品或信息。证据在评估过程中用于理解过程性
能，可以是文件、口头信息、数据或来自工具或其他来源的信息。
证据库用于存储已经获得的证据的存储库。
反馈演示评估结束时的一个流程步骤，此时评估团队会对评估结果提供早期反
馈。它通常涵盖主要优势和潜在的改进。如果合适的话，还提供了一组
临时过程能力简档。
调查的结果评估员记录的关于被评估组织单位的优势和潜在改进的评估，基于来自
访谈的口头确认和提出的工作成果(→证据)。

2 Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Term Definition
HIS “HerstellerInitiative Software” (Manufacturer Initiative Software):Different

working groups of German automotive manufacturers (Audi AG,
BMW Group, Daimler AG, Porsche AG, VOLKSWAGEN AG), formerly
working together in fields not involving competition on the development
of software for ECUs, including the subject of process assessments.
The activities of the HIS have been terminated in spring 2016.
HIS process scope A selected set of processes from Automotive SPICE which are as-
sessed (where applicable) in every assessment carried out by the au-
tomotive manufacturers represented in the HIS. Due to the termination
of the HIS work the HIS scope has been replaced by the → VDA pro-
cess scope.
Indicator Sources of objective evidence used to support the assessor’s judgment

in rating process attributes.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.3.1]
ISO/IEC330xxseries The set of International Standards ISO/IEC 33001:2015, ISO/IEC

33099 defines the requirements and resources needed for process as-
sessment.
Lead Assessor who has demonstrated the competencies to conduct an as-

assessor sessment and to monitor and verify the conformance of a process as-
sessment.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.12]
Process measure- Schema for use in characterizing a process quality characteristic of an

ment framework implemented process
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.4.6]
NDA Non-Disclosure Agreement
OEM “Original Equipment Manufacturer”. In the automotive industry this

term is used to describe the vehicle manufacturers. (See also →Tier
1…n).
Organization as- The organizational unit which is assessed. This usually refers to pro-
sessed jects in one or more departments in the assessed organization.
Practice level Lowest level of granularity within the Automotive SPICE process as-
sessment model, determined by the “base practices” and “generic
practices” of the processes. Strengths and potential improvements
should be traceable to this level and are derived from expectations
regarding a state-of-the-art implementation of the practices. Although
these expectations constitute good practices in engineering, their
achievement might not be satisfied in all cases because “state-of-the
art” is highly depending on the context and on individual interpretation.
学期定义

他的 “HerstellerInitiative Software”(制造商倡议软件):德国汽车制造
商(奥迪公司、宝马集团、戴姆勒公司、保时捷公司、大众公司 )的不同
工作组，以前在不涉及 ECU 软件开发竞争的领域合作，包括过程评估的
主题。HIS 的活动已于 2016 年春季终止。
他的过程范围汽车 SPICE 的一套精选流程，在 HIS 中代表的汽车制造商进行的每次评

估中都经过评估(如适用)。由于 HIS 工作的终止，HIS 范围已被→ VDA
过程范围所取代。
指示器用于支持评估员在评定过程属性中的判断的客观证据的来源。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.3.1]
ISO/iec 330 xx 系列国际标准 ISO/IEC 33001:2015、ISO/IEC 33099 定义了过程评估所需的

要求和资源。
首席评估证明有能力进行评估、监控和验证工艺评估一致性的评估员。
员 →[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.12]
过程测量框架用于表征已实施过程的过程质量特性的模式
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.4.6]
NDA 保密协议
设备原产商 “原始设备制造商”。在汽车工业中，这个术语用来描述汽车制造商。
(另请参见→第 1 级…n)。
评估的组织被评估的组织单位。这通常指被评估组织中一个或多个部门的项目。
实践水平汽车 SPICE 流程评估模型中的最低粒度级别，由流程的 “ 基本实
践”和“一般实践”决定。优势和潜在改进应可追溯到这一级别，并源
于对实践的最新实现的期望。尽管这些期望构成了工程中的良好实践，
但它们的实现可能并不是在所有情况下都令人满意，因为“最先进”高
度依赖于上下文和个人的解释。


Term Definition
Process assess- Model suitable for the purpose of assessing a specified process quality
ment model (PAM) characteristic, based on one or more process reference models
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.3.9]
Process reference Model comprising definitions of processes in a domain of application

model (PRM) described in terms of process purpose and outcomes, together with
an architecture describing the relationships between the processes.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.3.16]
Process context Set of factors, documented in the assessment input, that influence the
judgment, comprehension, and
comparability of process attribute ratings
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.16]
Process (capability) Set of process attribute ratings for an assessed process

profile → [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.18]
Process quality Measurable aspect of process quality; category of process

characteristic attributes that are significant to process quality.
→ [ISO/IEC 33001:2015, 3.2.10]
Set of process (ca- The collective representation of the capability profiles of each process
pability) profiles in the scope of the assessment.
SPICE Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination

Name of the starting project, elaborating the draft of ISO/IEC TR
15504. These days the term “SPICE” is used colloquially to refer to
ISO/IEC 330xx.
Tier 1…n The term “Tier 1…n” is used to refer to suppliers at various levels in the
supply chain. Direct suppliers to the OEM are referred to as “Tier 1”, a
supplier to a Tier 1 supplier is referred to as a “Tier 2”, etc.
VDA “Verband der Automobilindustrie”, the German association of Auto-

motive Industry
VDA process scope Standard set of processes to be considered in the Automotive

domain.
学期定义
过程评估模型基于一个或多个过程参考模型，适用于评估特定过程质量特性的模型
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.3.9]
流程参考模型模型包括应用领域中过程的定义，根据过程的目的和结果进行描述，以
(PRM) 及描述过程之间关系的体系结构。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.3.16]

过程上下文记录在评估输入中的一组因素，影响判断、理解和
过程属性评级的可比性
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.16]
过程(能力)概况被评估流程的一组流程属性评级
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.18]
过程质量特性过程质量的可测量方面；对过程质量很重要的过程属性的类别。
→[国际标准化组织/IEC 33001:2015，3.2.10]
一组流程(能力)配评估范围内每个过程的能力概况的集合表示。
置文件
香料软件过程改进和能力确定
开始项目的名称，详细说明 ISO/IEC TR 15504 草案。这些天
来,“SPICE”这个术语被通俗地用来指代 ISO/incublize xx。
第 1 层…n 术语“第 1 层…n 层”是指供应链中不同层次的供应商。OEM 的直接供应

商被称为“第 1 层”，第 1 层供应商的供应商被称为“第 2 层”，依此
类推。
VDA 德国汽车工业协会
VDA 进程范围汽车领域要考虑的标准流程集。

Introduction
介绍
The starting point for the development of this publication was the mandate
given by the Quality Management Board (QMB) of the VDA QMC to revise
Automotive SPICE 2.5 and the existing Blue-Gold Book in order to improve
the quality and reproducibility of assessment results. This task was as-
signed by the QMB to the working group 13 in the VDA QMC.
编制本出版物的出发点是 VDA QMC 质量管理委员会(QMB)授权修订汽车 SPICE

2.5 和现有的蓝金手册，以提高评估结果的质量和再现性。这项任务是 QMB
在 QMC VDA 签署给第 13 工作组的。
The objective of working group 13 is the definition of the Automotive SPICE
process reference and assessment model. In addition to that, it is the ob-
jective of the working group to give necessary clarifications and recom-
mendations for the application of Automotive SPICE in terms of performing
assessments and monitoring of resulting process improvements in the de-
velopment of software-based systems.
工作组 13 的目标是定义汽车 SPICE 流程参考和评估模型。除此之外，工作组
的目标是对汽车 SPICE 的应用进行必要的澄清和建议，以便在基于软件的系
统开发中执行评估和监控由此产生的流程改进。
To fulfill this mandate, the following activities were performed:
为了完成这一任务，开展了以下活动:
Improving the Automotive SPICE Process Assessment and Reference
Model regarding structure, inconsistencies, clarifications and additional
concepts. This was done with the publication of the 3.0 version of Automo-
tive SPICE in July 2015 [AS30].
改进汽车 SPICE 流程评估和参考模型的结构、不一致性、澄清和其他概念。

这是通过 2015 年 7 月 automotive SPICE 3.0 版本的发布实现的[AS30]。
Giving guidelines on the interpretation of Automotive SPICE and on As-
sessment performance. This is provided by the current publication.
为汽车 SPICE 的解释和评估性能提供指导。这是由当前出版物提供的。
Setting requirements for the qualification of assessors and update existing
procedures, training materials and examinations. This will be done in col-
laboration with the international assessor certification scheme (intacs) to

accompany the release and roll-out of this publication [intacs].
设定评估员资格要求，更新现有程序、培训材料和考试。这将与国际评估员
认证计划(intacs)合作完成，以配合本出版物的发布和推广[intacs]。
The current publication will replace the existing Blue-Gold Print and will be
valid with its official publication in the VDA QMC online shop.
目前的出版物将取代现有的蓝金印刷，并在 VDA QMC 网上商店的官方出版物
中有效。
The present publication addresses the mandate by proving two parts:
本出版物通过证明以下两个部分来解决这一问题:
Part 1: Interpretation and rating guidelines
第 1 部分:解释和评级指南
This part provides rules and recommendations for the rating performed
in an assessment.
本部分为评估中执行的评级提供规则和建议。

Part 2: Guidelines for performing the assessment
第 2 部分:执行评估的指南
By defining the requirements for the assessment process, it is intend-
ed to standardize the procedure, so that the companies involved in an
assessment are able to follow a defined assessments approach. This
present volume specifies the requirements related to the assessment
process, as well as the qualification of assessors carrying out assess-
ments based on Automotive SPICE.
通过定义评估过程的要求，旨在使程序标准化，以便参与评估的公司能
够遵循定义的评估方法。本卷规定了与评估过程相关的要求，以及基于
汽车 SPICE 进行评估的评估员的资格。
All rules and recommendations for carrying out assessments reflect best
practices from assessors having extensive experience in assessments
based on Automotive SPICE in various applications.
执行评估的所有规则和建议反映了评估人员的最佳实践，这些评估人员在基
于各种应用的汽车 SPICE 的评估方面具有丰富的经验。
Besides the knowledge of the participating members and third-party mem-
bers involved, the present publication leverages other sources giving valu-
able input, which has been proven in many years of assessment practice
and assessor trainings, in particular:
除了参与成员和相关第三方成员的知识外，本出版物还利用其他来源提供有
价值的信息，这些信息已在多年的评估实践和评估员培训中得到证实，特别
是:
 Book: “Automotive SPICE - Capability Level 2 und 3 in der Praxis” by
Dr. Pierre Metz [Metz2016]
 Pierre Metz 博士撰写的《汽车 SPICE -实践中的 2 级和 3 级能力》一书
[Metz2016]
This book gave significant and valuable input to chapter 2.1.4,
“Strategy and plan”, chapter 4, “Rating guidelines on process
capability level 2” and chapter 5, “Rating guidelines on process
capability level 3”.
本书为第 2.1.4 章“战略和计划”、第 4 章“过程能力等级 2 的评定指

南”和第 5 章“过程能力等级 3 的评定指南”提供了重要而有价值的信
息。

 Intacs white paper “Clarifying Myths with Process Maturity Models vs.
Agile” [IntAgile]
 Intacs 白皮书“澄清过程成熟度模型与敏捷的神话”[IntAgile]
This publication was considered to provide input to chapter 2.2.2
该出版物被认为是对第 2.2.2 章的贡献
“Agile environments”.
“敏捷环境”。
 Intacs training materials for provisional and competent course “Auto-
motive SPICE”.
 Intacs 临时和主管课程“汽车香料”的培训材料。
The existing training material was reviewed and evaluated to consider
the current body of knowledge in the domain of assessor education
[intacs].
对现有培训材料进行了审查和评估，以考虑评估员教育领域的现有知识
体系。

Document scope
文档范围
The scope of the current document is to support assessments using Auto-
motive SPICE. It addresses the process of performing the assessment and
in detail the rating performed in an assessment. It is based on the 3.1 ver-
sion of the Automotive SPICE Process Assessment and Reference Model.
当前文档的范围是支持使用 Auto- motive SPICE 进行评估。它阐述了执行评

估的流程，并详细介绍了评估中执行的评级。它基于汽车 SPICE 过程评估和
参考模型的 3.1 版本。
The intention of this publication is NOT to replace or extend the Automotive
SPICE PAM or PRM. Automotive SPICE 3.1 is a full process assessment
model (incl. reference model) complying to the requirements of ISO/IEC
33002. It can be used on its own to perform assessments.
本出版物的目的不是取代或扩展汽车香料帕姆或 PRM。汽车 SPICE 3.1 是符
合 ISO/IEC 33002 要求的全过程评估模型(包括参考模型)。它可以单独用于
执行评估。
The aim of this document is to set guidelines for the application of Automo-
tive SPICE to assist the assessors while planning, executing and reporting
the assessment. Beside this it specifically addresses the improvement pro-
cess which should resolve issues found in an assessment.
本文件的目的是为自动 SPICE 的应用制定指导方针，以帮助评估人员计划、
执行和报告评估。除此之外，它还特别说明了改进过程，该过程应解决评估
中发现的问题。
The target audience is predominantly assessors which are active in the au-
tomotive domain, but can also be seen as an additional input for assess-
ments in other domains. It also addresses other parties or roles involved or
affected by an Automotive SPICE assessment like the assessing organiza-
tion, the assessed organization or the assessment sponsor.
目标受众主要是活跃在汽车领域的评估员，但也可以被视为其他领域评估的
附加输入。它还涉及汽车 SPICE 评估所涉及或影响的其他方或角色，如评估
组织、被评估组织或评估发起人。
Furthermore, the document is intended to support the understanding of the
assessment process and should be taken in case of dissent about the re-
sult of an assessment as a basis for clarification.
此外，本文件旨在支持对评估过程的理解，并在对评估结果有异议时作为澄
清的基础。
Relation to ISO/IEC 330xx series

与 ISO/IEC 330xx 系列的关系
The ISO/IEC 330xx series of international standards define the require-
ments and resources needed for process assessment. Several standards
in the ISO/IEC 330xx family were intended to replace and extend parts of
the former ISO/IEC 15504 series.
ISO/nexus xx 系列国际标准定义了过程评估所需的要求和资源。ISO/xx 系列
中的几个标准旨在取代和扩展以前的 ISO/IEC 15504 系列的部分内容。


ISO/IEC 330xx process assessments are conducted based on three core
elements:
ISO/innucing xx 流程评估基于三个核心要素进行:
 process models that define processes, the entities that are the subject
to assessment;
 定义过程的过程模型，作为评估主体的实体；
 process measurement frameworks that provide scales for evaluating
specified attributes; and
 为评估特定属性提供尺度的过程度量框架；和
 a specification of the process to be followed in conducting assessments.
 进行评估时应遵循的流程规范。
The intention of the Working Group 13 of the VDA QMC was to provide a
domain specific set of documents covering these three elements for
performing assessments conformant to ISO/IEC 33002. This has been
achieved
VDA QMC 第 13 工作组的目的是提供一套涵盖这三个要素的特定领域的文档，

用于执行符合 ISO/IEC 33002 的评估。这一点已经实现
 by providing the Automotive SPICE process reference and assess-
ment model [AS30];
 通过提供汽车 SPICE 流程参考和评估模型[AS30]；
 by referencing ISO/IEC 33020 [ISO33020] as the mandatory process
measurement framework for assessment of process capability in the
Automotive SPICE PAM and;
 通过引用 ISO/IEC 33020 [ISO33020]作为汽车 SPICE PAM 过程能力评估
的强制性过程测量框架；
 by providing a documented assessment process conformant to ISO/
IEC 33002 in chapter 6 of this volume.
 通过在本卷的第 6 章中提供符合 ISO/ IEC 33002 标准的书面评估流程。
Relation to Automotive SPICE

与汽车香料的关系
At the beginning of the development of Automotive SPICE 31 different pro-
cesses have been compiled by the Automotive Special Interest Group (Au-
toSIG) from ISO/IEC 12207:2008 to provide a process set suitable for as-
sessments in the automotive domain. To allow assessments with reasona-
ble effort the “Herstellerinitiative Software” (HIS) selected a prioritized sub-
set of 15 processes as a standard process scope for assessments. In the
past 10 years the majority of assessments have been performed using this
so-called HIS scope. With the termination of the work of the HIS at the be-
ginning of 2016 the VDA QMC working group took over the task to adapt
this scope to the new versions of Automotive SPICE.
在汽车 SPICE 开发之初， ISO/IEC 12207:2008 汽车特别兴趣小组 (Au-

toSIG)编制了 31 种不同的工艺，以提供一套适用于汽车领域评估的工艺。为
了能够合理地进行评估,“hersteller initiative Software ”( HIS)选择
了 15 个流程的优先子集作为评估的标准流程范围。在过去 10 年中，大多数
评估都是使用这种所谓的 his 范围进行的。随着 HIS 的工作在 2016 年初终
止，VDA QMC 工作组接管了将该范围适应新版本汽车 SPICE 的任务。
Since this scope has been well-proven over years of assessments the
working group 13 decided to maintain the set of processes in principle. This
was done in order not to increase the effort for performing an assessment
and provide comparability to former assessment results.
由于这一范围已在多年评估中得到充分证明，第 13 工作组决定原则上保留这
套程序。这样做是为了不增加执行评估的工作量，并提供与以前评估结果的
可比性。
8 dokum ent wurde bereitgestellt vom

It is a principle of process assessments according to the ISO/IEC 330xx se-
ries that the process scope (the selection of processes to be investigated in
an assessment) might be adapted in accordance with the sponsor and with
respect to the purpose of the assessment.
根据 ISO/xx 系列，过程评估的一个原则是过程范围(评估中要调查的过程的
选择)可以根据发起人和评估的目的进行调整。
The following VDA process scope provides a standard set, which is rec-
ommended to give a sound overview of an assessed project. According to
the purpose of the assessment, the process scope for an assessment
might be tailored to fewer processes or extended by other processes from
Automotive SPICE or other process reference models like ISO/IEC 12207
[ISO12207].
以下 VDA 过程范围提供了一套标准，建议用于对评估项目进行全面概述。根
据评估的目的，评估的流程范围可能会针对更少的流程进行调整，或者通过
汽车 SPICE 或其他流程参考模型(如 ISO/IEC 12207 [ISO12207])中的其他流
程进行扩展。
The VDA Scope is based on the release 3.1 of the Automotive SPICE pro-
cess reference and assessment model [Automotive SPICE].
VDA 范围基于汽车 SPICE 流程参考和评估模型 3.1 版[汽车 SPICE]。

doku ment wurde bereitgestellt vom 9

The following 16 processes are clustered in the VDA process scope:
以下 16 个流程集中在 VDA 流程范围内:
VDA Scope
ACQ.4 Supplier Monitoring
SYS.2 System Requirements Analysis
SYS.3 System Architectural Design
SYS.4 System Integration and Integration Test

SYS.5 System Qualification Test
SWE.1 Software Requirements Analysis
SWE.2 Software Architectural Design
SWE.3 Software Detailed Design and Unit Construction
SWE.4 Software Unit Verification
SWE.5 Software Integration and Integration Test

SWE.6 Software Qualification Test
SUP.1 Quality Assurance
SUP.8 Configuration Management
SUP.9 Problem Resolution Management
SUP.10 Change Request Management
MAN.3 Project Management
VDA 示波器
ACQ.4 供应商监控
SYS.2 系统需求分析
SYS.3 系统架构设计
SYS.4 系统集成和集成测试
SYS.5 系统合格测试
瑞典. 1 软件需求分析
SWE.2 软件架构设计
瑞典. 3 软件详细设计和单元构造
SWE.4 软件单元验证
SWE.5 软件集成和集成测试
SWE.6 软件资格测试
补充 1 质量保证
补充 8 结构管理
补充 9 问题解决管理
补充 10 变更请求管理
男人 3 项目管理
This process set correlates with the former HIS scope. The additional pro-
cess was necessary to reflect the structural changes in the engineering
processes.
这个过程集与前一个 his 范围相关。额外的过程是必要的，以反映工程过程
中的结构变化。
10 月 10 日

Part 1: Interpretation and rating guidelines
第 1 部分:解释和评级指南
1 Application of interpretation and rating guidelines
2 解释和评级指南的应用
2.1 Overview
2.2 概观
The purpose of part one of the current publication is to support the

assessors in interpreting the Automotive SPICE process reference and
assessment models and rating the process attributes for the given target
capability level. Since most of the assessments in the automotive domain
do not address capability levels higher than 3, no guidelines are provided
for level 4 or 5.
当前出版物第一部分的目的是支持评估人员解释汽车 SPICE 流程参考和评估
模型，并对给定目标能力水平的流程属性进行评级。由于汽车领域的大部分
评估都不涉及高于 3 级的能力水平，因此没有为 4 级或 5 级提供指导。
Chapter 1, “Application of interpretation and rating guidelines” provides an
overall guideline on rating in an assessment. It introduces a clearer defini-
tion of how to set-up and consider the assessment scope and how to rate
based on this assessment scope.
第 1 章“解释和评级指南的应用”提供了评估中评级的总体指南。它对如何
设置和考虑评估范围以及如何基于该评估范围进行评级做出了更清晰的定
义。
An integral part of the interpretation and rating guidelines is rules and rec-
ommendations addressing specific key concepts, application environments
and the different capability levels.
解释和评级指南的一个组成部分是针对特定关键概念、应用环境和不同能力
水平的规则和建议。
In chapter 2, “Key concepts and overall guidelines” rules and recommenda-
tions related to key concepts introduced or modified with the 3.1 version of
Automotive SPICE are given. Further, rules and recommendations for rat-
ing in specific application environments are provided.
第 2 章“关键概念和总体指南”给出了与 3.1 版汽车 SPICE 引入或修改的关
键概念相关的规则和建议。此外，还提供了在特定应用环境中进行评级的规
则和建议。
Chapter 3, “Rating guidelines on process performance (level 1)” is related
to the process specific outcomes, base practices and work products asso-
ciated with the capability level1. In this chapter, specific rating rules and
recommendations are given for each process of the VDA Scope.
第 3 章，“过程性能的评定指南(1 级)”涉及与能力级别 1 相关的过程特定
结果、基本实践和工作产品。在这一章中，针对 VDA 范围内的每个流程给出
了具体的评级规则和建议。
In chapter 4, “Rating guidelines on process capability level 2” and chap-
ter 5, “Rating guidelines on process capability level 3” specific rating rules
and recommendations for each process attribute of level 2 and 3 are given.
在第 4 章“过程能力等级 2 的评定指南”和第 5 章“过程能力等级 3 的评定
指南”中，给出了 2 级和 3 级过程属性的具体评定规则和建议。
11 月 11 日

2.3 Assessment scope
2.4 评估范围
2.4.1 Motivation
2.4.2 动机
Every process needs a certain input delivered by other processes to pro-
duce its desired outputs. A root cause for diverging assessment results is a
different consideration of these inputs when rating the process performance
attribute on level 1. In case the input is not complete, the output of the re-
ceiving process will also be incomplete in terms of a given assessment
scope. As an example, the completeness of the system test cases in the
System Qualification Test Process SYS.5 will directly depend on the com-
pleteness of the system requirements.
每一个过程都需要其他过程提供的某种输入，以产生它所期望的输出。产生
不同评估结果的根本原因是，当在等级 1 上评定过程性能属性时，对这些输
入的考虑不同。在输入不完整的情况下，就给定的评估范围而言，接收过程
的输出也是不完整的。例如，系统鉴定测试过程 SYS.5 中系统测试用例的完
整性将直接取决于系统要求的完整性。
Recent years have shown that there are different approaches regarding
whether and to what extent an incomplete input affects the rating of the re-
ceiving process. This is often due to different assessment purposes of the
assessment. In fact, these assessment purposes may influence the deci-
sion of an assessor when rating the process performance attribute.
近年来的研究表明，对于不完整的输入是否以及在多大程度上影响接收过程
的评分，有不同的方法。这往往是由于评估的评估目的不同。事实上，在评
定过程性能属性时，这些评估目的可能会影响评估者的决定。
Typically, the following scenarios are considered:
通常，会考虑以下情况:
 Assessment purpose “process improvement”
 评估目的“过程改进”
The purpose of the assessment is to provide a base for process im-
provement.
评估的目的是为过程改进提供基础。
 Assessment purpose “process-related product risk”

 评估目的“过程相关产品风险”
The purpose of the assessment shall give evidence for process risk
impacting on the quality of a specific product release.
评估的目的是为影响特定产品放行质量的过程风险提供证据。
“Process improvement”:
“过程改进”:
If improvement potentials to one specific process are to be identified, a
weakness in other processes should not affect the rating. If all base
practices in the process are fully performed and the corresponding
outcomes are achieved with respect to the locally available input, there
is no reason to downrate the process attribute PA 1.1. For this as-
sessment purpose, it is not relevant in terms of improvement of the
process, whether its input is complete with respect to a defined prod-
uct release.
如果要确定某个特定流程的改进潜力，其他流程中的弱点不应影响评
级。如果流程中的所有基本实践都已完全执行，并且相对于本地可用的
输入实现了相应的结果，则没有理由降低流程属性 PA 1.1 的等级。对
于这一评估目的，就过程的改进而言，其输入相对于规定的产品发布是
否完整并不重要。
In this case, a set of exemplary input for the assessed process might
be sufficient to provide a sound capability rating and identify any nec-
在这种情况下，用于被评估过程的一组示例性输入可能足以提供可靠的
能力评级并识别任何 nec-

essary improvement potential. Any input with a sufficient quantity and
quality will allow a prediction, how this process will perform in a com-
parable development environment.
必要的改进潜力。任何具有足够数量和质量的输入将允许一个预测，这
个过程将如何在一个可比较的开发环境中执行。
Example: Consider the situation where all base practices of the SYS.5
process are fully performed and the corresponding outcomes are
achieved, but only 20% of the stakeholder requirements of the project
have been processed in SYS.2.
例如:考虑这样一种情况，SYS.5 过程的所有基本实践都完全执行了，并
且实现了相应的结果，但是在 SYS.2 中只处理了项目涉众需求的 20%
With respect to process improvement the conclusion can be drawn
that the process would be fully capable (F) in principle if applied as is
in another development. There will be no need to derive any improve-
ment actions based on the assessment result for the SYS.5 process.
关于工艺改进，可以得出这样的结论:如果在另一个开发中原样应用，
该工艺原则上完全能够(F)。无需根据 SYS.5 流程的评估结果制定任何
改进措施。
“Process-related product risk”:
“过程相关产品风险”:
On the other hand, a successful implementation of the process per-
formance might be interpreted as signifying that the system has been
fully tested with respect to the full functionality to be delivered. This
means that at the end the process output needs to cover all stake-
holder requirements. If this is not the case, the process attribute PA
另一方面，过程性能的成功实现可能被解释为表示系统已经针对要交付
的全部功能进行了全面测试。这意味着最终过程输出需要覆盖所有利益
相关者的需求。如果不是这种情况，流程属性 PA
1.1 might be downrated.
1.1 可能会降级。
For process-related product risk, the most important criterion is,
whether a given set of top level requirements has been processed cor-
rectly and completely in the chain of all assessed processes, thus re-
sulting in a product which is “ready for delivery”.
对于与流程相关的产品风险，最重要的标准是，在所有评估流程链中，
给定的一组顶级要求是否已得到正确和完整的处理，从而产生“准备交
付”的产品。
Example: Besides the achievement of the outcomes within the SYS.5
process, the simple question arises: “Was the system completely test-
ed for delivery according to the given top-level stakeholder require-
ments?” In the scenario described above, the answer would clearly be
“no”, because only 20% of the stakeholder requirements have been
tested (see example above) resulting in a significant risk that specified
system functionalities will not operate as defined.
例子:除了在 SYS.5 过程中取得成果之外，一个简单的问题出现了:“系
统是否根据给定的顶级涉众需求进行了完整的交付测试？”在上面描述
的场景中，答案显然是“否”，因为只有 20%的涉众需求被测试过(见上
面的例子),这导致了指定的系统功能不能按定义运行的巨大风险。
Within this scenario, an assessor might consider the completeness of
the SYS.5 output with respect to the stakeholder requirements. This
may lead to the decision that the process attribute PA 1.1 is only large-
ly (L) achieved, although all outcomes of SYS.5 are fully achieved with
respect to the locally available input.
在这种情况下，评估者可能会考虑 SYS.5 输出相对于涉众要求的完整
性。这可能导致过程属性 PA 1.1 仅在很大程度上(L)被实现的决定，尽
管 SYS.5 的所有结果相对于本地可用的输入被完全实现。

第 13 天

Both approaches lead to diverging assessment results. Engineering organ-
izations have been confused about the capability achieved, depending on
the approach the assessor has had in mind. As a result, necessary infor-
mation needed for process improvement might have been lost, if the com-
pleteness of the process output with respect to the stakeholder require-
ments was in focus of the assessment and vice versa.
这两种方法导致不同的评估结果。工程组织对所实现的能力感到困惑，这取
决于评估者心中的方法。因此，如果过程输出相对于利益相关者要求的完整
性是评估的焦点，则过程改进所需的必要信息可能已经丢失，反之亦然。
There is no clear indication given in the PAM, how such assessment pur-
poses shall be considered. It therefore is the aim of the authors of this pub-
lication that the process assessment model can be applied consistently in
order to produce comparable and reproducible assessment results, which
provide the necessary information needed for both approaches. Restricting
the application of Automotive SPICE to either one or the other is not seen
as a reasonable and constructive approach.
PAM 中没有明确指出应如何考虑此类评估目的。因此，本申请的作者的目的
是可以一致地应用过程评估模型，以便产生可比较的和可再现的评估结果，
其提供两种方法所需的必要信息。将汽车 SPICE 的应用限制在一个或另一个
上被认为是不合理的和建设性的方法。
In general, there is no conflict between the both use-cases; the differences
and confusion due to different, and often imprecisely defined, assessment
scopes. To solve this issue, a clearer definition of the assessment scope
and a definition how to consider the process context is provided in chapter
一般来说，这两种用例之间没有冲突；由于不同的、通常定义不精确的评估
范围而导致的差异和混乱。为了解决这个问题，在第章中提供了评估范围的
更清晰的定义以及如何考虑过程上下文的定义
2.4.3 and 1.2.3 of this publication. The latter has been elaborated under the
following constraints and assumptions:
2.4.4和本出版物的 1.2.3。后者是在以下限制和假设下阐述的:
 Comparability of assessment results cannot be reached unless the
project scope comprising the process context is comparable.
 除非包含过程背景的项目范围是可比较的，否则无法达到评估结果的可
比性。
 A rating of the base practices shall always be made with respect to the
input locally available to the process under investigation.
 应始终根据调查过程中本地可用的输入对基本实践进行评级。
 The coverage of the scope in terms of completeness shall always be
made using distinctive rules for rating the process performance
attribute.
 就完整性而言，范围的覆盖范围应始终使用独特的规则来评定过程性能
属性。
 The rules for downrating the process performance attribute shall inhibit
a “Fully” rating of the process attribute PA 1.1.
 降低工艺性能属性等级的规则应禁止工艺属性 PA 1.1 的“完全”等
级。
 Completeness with respect to the scope of the assessment may be
justified by the assessed organization by means of reviews or other
techniques.
 被评估组织可通过审查或其他技术证明评估范围的完整性。
To enable a consistent application of the Automotive SPICE PAM, chap-
ter 1.2.3 provides such distinctive rating rules and gives a guideline to de-
fine the process context in the assessment scope. Templates and exam-
ples are given in the annex.
为了实现汽车 SPICE PAM 的一致应用，第 1.2.3 章提供了这种独特的评级规
则，并给出了在评估范围内定义过程上下文的指南。附件中给出了模板和示
例。


1.2.2 Defining the assessment scope
1.2.3 定义评估范围
As defined in ISO/IEC 33001, 3.2.8 the assessment scope shall provide
根据 ISO/IEC 33001 标准 3.2.8 的定义，评估范围应提供

“The definition of the boundaries of the assessment, provided as part of
the assessment input, encompassing
“评估范围的定义，作为评估输入的一部分，包括
 the boundaries of the organizational unit for the assessment, the pro-
cesses to be included, the quality level for each process to be as-
sessed and
 评估组织单位的界限、要包括的过程、要评估的每个过程的质量水平以
及
 the context within which the processes operate (process context)”.
 流程在其中运行的上下文(流程上下文)”。
1.2.3.1 Defining the boundaries of the assessed organizational unit

1.2.3.2 定义被评估组织单位的边界
As defined in ISO/IEC 33002, the boundaries of the assessed organiza-
tional unit according to the definition in ISO/IEC 33001 shall be given in the
assessment scope. The definition of the organizational boundaries shall be
given in terms of
根据 ISO/IEC 33002 的定义，评估范围中应给出符合 ISO/IEC 33001 定义的

被评估组织单位的边界。组织边界的定义应在以下方面给出
 the localization of the involved organizational unit(s) and
 相关组织单位的本地化，以及
 the responsibilities of the involved organizational unit(s).
 相关组织单位的职责。
These boundaries shall always be defined with respect to the defined pro-
cesses (see chapter 1.2.2.2) and the defined process context (see chapter
1.2.3). In summary, the boundaries shall identify which part of the organiza-
tion is responsible for the performance of the given processes in the scope
and provide information about the location of the development sites. This is
a necessary input for the planning of the assessment.
这些边界应始终根据已定义的过程(见 1.2.2.2 章节)和已定义的过程背景(见
第 1.2.3 章)进行定义。总之，界限应确定组织的哪一部分负责范围内给定过
程的性能，并提供有关开发地点位置的信息。这是评估规划的必要输入。
1.2.3.3 Defining the processes to be included

1.2.3.4 定义要包含的过程
The VDA Scope defined at the beginning of this document provides a
standard selection of processes that are recommended for assessment to
give a comprehensive overview of an assessed project. Depending on the
purpose of the assessment, this may be tailored or extended.
本文开头定义的 VDA 范围提供了推荐进行评估的标准流程选择，以全面概述

被评估的项目。根据评估的目的，这可能是定制的或扩展的。
The processes to be assessed shall be identified. In case of tailoring of the
VDA scope a rationale shall be documented for choosing this specific set of
processes with respect to the purpose of the assessment.
应确定待评估的过程。如果对 VDA 范围进行调整，则应记录根据评估目的选
择这一组特定流程的理由。
Each process in the assessment scope shall be assessed and the result
shall be documented in the assessment report. To ensure a sufficient base
应对评估范围内的每个过程进行评估，并将结果记录在评估报告中。为了确
保有足够的基础

15 日星期五

for rating, each process defined in the scope shall be at least once per-
formed.
对于评级，范围中定义的每个过程应至少执行一次。
Exceptionally there might be the need to exclude or add processes after
agreement of the assessment scope, e.g. during the execution of the as-
sessment. Any exclusion of processes in the rating shall be documented by
a modified assessment scope and shall be approved by the sponsor of the
assessment. An exclusion of a process must not be done based on a “not
applicable” classification of the process.
在特殊情况下，可能需要在同意评估范围后，例如在执行评估期间，排除或
增加流程。评级过程中的任何排除都应通过修改评估范围进行记录，并应得
到评估发起人的批准。不得根据流程的“不适用”分类排除流程。
1.2.3.5 Defining the target capability level

1.2.3.6 定义目标能力水平
Since the measurement framework used in Automotive SPICE is applicable
for rating capability, the term “capability level” as a refinement for the “quali-
ty level” is used. There are five capability levels specified in ISO/IEC 33020
for the assessment. As mentioned before, the rules and recommendations
given in this publication are only considering capability levels 1 to 3, due to
the fact that this covers most of the Automotive SPICE assessments in the
automotive domain.
由于汽车 SPICE 中使用的测量框架适用于能力评级，因此使用术语“能力水

平”作为“质量水平”的细化。 ISO/IEC 33020 为评估指定了五个能力级
别。如前所述，本出版物中给出的规则和建议仅考虑 1 至 3 级能力，因为这
涵盖了汽车领域的大多数汽车 SPICE 评估。
Since the planning of the assessment is significantly influenced by the
choice of the target capability level, the intended maximum capability level
to be assessed shall be defined as part of the assessment scope.
由于评估的规划受到目标能力水平选择的显著影响，因此要评估的预期最大
能力水平应被定义为评估范围的一部分。
1.2.4 Defining the process context in the assessment

scope

1.2.5 在评估范围内定义过程上下文
In ISO/IEC 33001, 3.2.16 the process context is defined as
在 ISO/IEC 33001 3 . 2 . 16 中，过程上下文定义为
“the set of factors, documented in the assessment input, that influence the
judgment, comprehension, and comparability of process attribute ratings”.
记录在评估输入中的一组因素，影响对过程属性评级的判断、理解和可比
性。
When defining the process context, the boundaries within which the pro-
cesses operate in terms of
定义过程上下文时，过程在以下方面运行的界限
 a set of stakeholder requirements and
 一组利益相关者的要求和
 a set of change requests
shall be identified.
 应确定一组变更请求。
As a default, we suggest the following categories of process contexts are
offered when defining the assessment scope:
默认情况下，我们建议在定义评估范围时提供以下类别的过程上下文:

Process context category A (Parts of a product / delivery)
过程上下文类别 A(产品/交付的一部分)
Exemplarily, for this category the process context may be defined as:
示例性地，对于这一类别，过程上下文可以定义为:
 All stakeholder requirements and changes assigned to a defined or-
ganizational unit.
 分配给一个确定的组织单位的所有利益相关者的要求和变更。
 All stakeholder requirements and changes related to a defined archi-
tectural element.
 所有利益相关者的要求和变更都与一个已定义的架构元素相关。
 All stakeholder requirements and changes to be implemented between
two defined project milestones.
 在两个已定义的项目里程碑之间要实施的所有涉众要求和变更。
 All changes and affected stakeholder requirements in a (delta) project
developing additional functionalities based on an existing system or
software.
 在基于现有系统或软件开发附加功能的(delta)项目中，所有的变更和
受影响的涉众需求。
 All changes between two defined project milestones.
 两个已定义项目里程碑之间的所有变更。
 All software requirements implemented by changed processes.
 所有软件需求都是由变更后的流程实现的。
 A set of stakeholder requirements and changes from different projects
to enable a capability rating of all processes in the scope.
 一组来自不同项目的涉众需求和变更，以便对范围内的所有过程进行能
力评级。
A process context of category A can be chosen for various assessment
purposes such as
类别 A 的过程上下文可被选择用于各种评估目的，例如
 internal process improvement
 内部流程改进
 supplier capability determination or benchmarking, or
 供应商能力确定或基准，或

Process context category B (Entire product / delivery)
过程上下文类别 B(整个产品/交付)
Exemplarily, for this category the process context may be defined as:
示例性地，对于这一类别，过程上下文可以定义为:
 All stakeholder requirements and changes valid for a specific product
release
 对特定产品版本有效的所有利益相关者的要求和变更
 All software requirements and changes valid for a specific software re-
lease operating in a defined system environment.
 对在定义的系统环境中运行的特定软件版本有效的所有软件要求和变
更。
 Complete system delivered by a Tier 1 supplier
 由 1 级供应商交付的完整系统
 A complete software platform delivered by an internal or external or-
ganization.
 由内部或外部组织提供的完整软件平台。
A process context of category B can be chosen for various assessment
purposes such as
类别 B 的过程上下文可被选择用于各种评估目的，例如
 the process-related product risk of the delivery in terms of evaluating
the current delivery status, and identifying corrective actions
 在评估当前交付状态和确定纠正措施方面，交付的过程相关产品风险
 internal process improvement
 内部流程改进
第 17 届全国妇女大会

 supplier capability determination or benchmarking
 供应商能力确定或基准
Each process attribute rating for the project instances (see chapter 1.2.4)
shall strictly remain within the boundaries of the process context in the as-
sessment scope. The following general rules shall be applied to address
the completeness of the process output with respect to the defined process
context.
项目实例的每个过程属性等级(见第 1.2.4 章)应严格保持在评估范围内的过

程上下文的界限内。以下一般规则应适用于解决过程输出相对于已定义的过
程环境的完整性。
[CPL.RL1] If only some, non-critical gaps related to the coverage of
the process output regarding the defined assessment scope have
been identified, GP 1.1.1 must not be downrated.
[CPL.RL1]如果仅确定了与已定义评估范围的过程输出覆盖范围相关的
一些非关键差距，GP 1.1.1 不得降级。
[CPL.RL2] If many, and/or critical gaps related to the coverage of the
process output regarding the scope have been identified, GP 1.1.1
must not be rated higher than L.
[CPL.RL2]如果已经确定了与范围的流程输出覆盖范围相关的许多和/或
关键差距，GP 1.1.1 的评级不得高于 l。
Note: A further downrating to P or N may be justified by significant criticality of
the identified gaps or an only partially coverage of the assessment scope.
注:进一步降级为 P 或 N 可能是由于已识别差距的重要程度或仅部分覆盖了评估
范围。
1.2.6 Defining instances when setting up the

assessment scope
1.2.7 设置评估范围时定义实例
Depending on different constraints, the same process might be applied in
different process instances within the same project e.g. for parts that are
developed using model-based approaches in comparison to parts that are
manual coded. Therefore, different process attribute ratings might be
derived for different instances of the rated process. The corresponding
rating methods are provided in the measurement framework of ISO/IEC
33020, 5.4.1.
根据不同的约束条件，相同的流程可能应用于同一项目的不同流程实例中，
例如，与手动编码的零件相比，使用基于模型的方法开发的零件。因此，不
同的过程属性等级可以从不同的被评定的过程实例中得到。在 ISO/IEC
33020 的测量框架 5.4.1 中提供了相应的评级方法。
There are different use cases, where a separation of a process into in-
stances may be reasonable. Building instances may reflect the need of a
higher granularity of the assessment findings due to the execution of the
process with different approaches or in separate organizations or locations.
在不同的用例中，将流程分成实例可能是合理的。由于使用不同的方法或在
不同的组织或位置执行流程，构建实例可能反映了对更高粒度的评估结果的
需求。
Setting up instances doesn’t change the given scope and process context
of an assessment. In terms of the rating rules described in chapter 1.2.3,
the assessment scope still applies. If instances are defined, they all shall
be rated according to the given scope and the rules shall be applied on
each process performance attribute rating of each single instance.
设置实例不会改变评估的给定范围和过程上下文。就第 1.2.3 章描述的评级
规则而言，评估范围仍然适用。如果定义了实例，则应根据给定的范围对它
们进行评级，并且这些规则应应用于每个单个实例的每个过程性能属性评
级。
To provide a more detailed understanding of the term “process instance”,
the following exemplary use cases are given:
为了提供对术语“过程实例”的更详细的理解，给出以下示例性用例:

 A project has used standard process version 2 until March 2016, and
standard process version 3 since then. If the assessor can clearly see
that the usage of these two standard process versions actually do not
overlap, a reasonable instantiation may be:
 某项目在 2016 年 3 月之前一直使用标准流程版本 2，此后一直使用标准
流程版本 3。如果评估者可以清楚地看到这两个标准流程版本的使用实
际上没有重叠，合理的实例化可能是:
- A rating of process instance “SWE.3 until March 2016”
- 流程实例“SWE.3 至 2016 年 3 月”的评级
- A separate rating of Process instance “SWE.3 after March 2016”
- 流程实例的单独评级“SWE . 3 after 2016 年 3 月”
 Parties responsible for different hierarchical levels in the architecture
of a mechatronic product development project use different require-
ments engineering approaches, e.g.:
 负责机电产品开发项目架构中不同层次的各方使用不同的需求工程方
法，例如:
- A rating of process instance “SYS.2 / Mechatronic level”
- 流程实例“系统 2 /机电级别”的评级
- A separate rating of process instance “SYS.2 / ECU level”
- 流程实例“SYS.2 / ECU 级别”的单独评级
- A rating of process instance “SWE.2 / Application SW level”
- 流程实例“软件 2 /应用软件级别”的评级
- A separate rating of process instance “SWE.2/ Basis SW level”
- 流程实例的单独评级“SWE.2/基础软件级别”
 Different reuse strategies used for different parts of the overall SW, e.g.
 对整个软件的不同部分使用不同的重用策略，例如
- A rating of process instance “SWE.x / Platform code”
- 流程实例“SWE.x /平台代码”的评级
- A rating of process instance “SWE.x / Project specific developed
code”
- 流程实例“SWE.x /项目特定开发代码”的评级
 Different SW development paradigms are used for different parts of
the overall SW, e.g.:

 不同的软件开发范例用于整个软件的不同部分，例如:
- A rating of process instance “SWE.3 / Model-based development”
- 对流程实例“SWE.3 /基于模型的开发”的评级
- A rating of process instance “SWE.3 / Manual coding”
- 流程实例“SWE.3 /手动编码”的评级
 Different sub-projects use different project management approaches,
e.g.:
 不同的子项目使用不同的项目管理方法，例如:
- A rating of process instance “MAN.3 / SW level”
- 流程实例“人员 3 /软件级别”的评级
- A separate rating of process instance “MAN.3 / Overall project”
- 流程实例“人 3 /整个项目”的单独评级
 Different organizational units develop different parts of the software.
These organizational units might even be located in different geo-
graphical locations and regions, with probably different social-cultural
backgrounds, e.g.:
 不同的组织单位开发软件的不同部分。这些组织单位甚至可能位于不同
的地理位置和地区，可能具有不同的社会文化背景，例如:
- A rating of the process instances “SWE.x / Standard SW compo-
nents in the reusable platform – Asia”
- 流程实例“SWE.x /可重用平台中的标准软件组件–亚洲”的评级
- A rating of the process instances “SWE.x / Standard SW compo-
nents in the reusable platform – Europe”
- 对流程实例“可重用平台中的 SWE.x /标准软件组件-欧洲”的评
级
月 19 日

- A rating of the process instances “SWE.x / All customer-
- 流程实例的评级“SWE.x /所有客户-
/application-specific SW components – Germany”
/特定应用软件组件–德国”
Reasons for assessing different process instances separately can be
meaningful e.g.
分别评估不同过程实例的原因可能是有意义的，例如
 in order to have company-internal benchmarking
 为了有公司内部的基准
 for a more accurate understanding of the various characteristics in the
organization in order to better launch precise process improvement ini-
tiatives
 为了更准确地理解组织中的各种特性，以便更好地发起精确的过程改进
计划
The ratings of the process attributes for each process instance shall be
documented in the assessment report.
每个过程实例的过程属性等级应记录在评估报告中。
In case instances are defined, a process is rated independently for each in-
stance thus resulting in separate ratings of the process. This requires an
aggregation of the results to a single process attribute rating considering
the impact of the instance on the overall rating. The recommendations how
to perform the aggregation can be found in chapter 1.3.3.
在定义实例的情况下，为每个实例独立地对过程进行评级，从而导致对过程
的单独评级。考虑到实例对总体评级的影响，这需要将结果汇总到单个流程
属性评级中。如何执行汇总的建议可在第 1.3.3 章中找到。
2.5 General rating practice

2.6 一般评级惯例
2.6.1 Rating outcomes and indicators
2.6.2 评级结果和指标
According to the ISO/IEC 33002, which defines the requirements for per-
forming process assessments, it is always mandatory to rate the process
attributes [ISO/IEC 33002:2015].
根据定义预成型工艺评估要求的 ISO/IEC 33002，必须对工艺属性进行评级
[ISO/IEC 33002:2015]。
Nevertheless, in terms of achieving a structured approach to determine the
rating of a process attribute, ISO/IEC 33020 provides the following
possibility:
然而，就实现结构化方法以确定过程属性的等级而言， ISO/IEC 33020 提供
了以下可能性:
Process outcomes and process attribute outcomes may be characterized
as an intermediate step to providing a process attribute rating. [ISO/IEC
33002:2015, 5.4]
过程结果和过程属性结果可以被表征为提供过程属性评级的中间步骤。 [国
际标准化组织/IEC 33002:2015，5.4]
As mentioned in the overview chapter, part 1 of this publication provides
rating rules and recommendations. These rules and recommendations ei-
ther affect directly the process attribute rating or address this so-called
“characterization of process (attribute) outcomes”.
如概述章节所述，本出版物的第 1 部分提供了评级规则和建议。这些规则和
建议要么直接影响过程属性评级，要么解决所谓的“过程(属性)结果的表
征”。
In the recent years of application of Automotive SPICE, the terminology
“rating a base practice” or “rating a generic practice” has been established
as a synonym for performing this step of characterization. To avoid confu-
在最近几年汽车 SPICE 的应用中，术语“评定基本实践”或“评定一般实
践”已被确立为执行这一表征步骤的同义词。为了避免混淆-
20 日上午

sion in the community, the present publication continues using this termi-
nology when defining rules and recommendations which are not directly af-
fecting process attribute ratings.
在社区中，本出版物在定义不直接影响过程属性评级的规则和建议时继续使
用该术语。
Formally, since base and generic practices are indicators and thereby only
sources of objective evidence used to support the assessor’s judgment in
rating process attributes, a rating of indicators is not a defined term in the
ISO/IEC 330xx series.
从形式上来说，由于基础和通用实践是指标，因此只是用于支持评估员在评
级过程属性中的判断的客观证据的来源，指标评级不是 ISO/incublize xx 系
列中的定义术语。
In this context – and since Automotive SPICE has a defined relationship
between process outcomes and base practices – the terminology “rating a
在这种情况下，由于汽车 SPICE 在过程结果和基本实践之间有明确的关系，
术语“a 级
… practice” means:
……实践”是指:
“Characterizing the outcome based on the indicator to compile a
consistent process attribute rating”
“根据指标表征结果，以编制一致的流程属性评级”
2.6.3 Sampling of work products for rating

2.6.4 评定工作产品的抽样
The selection of the work products has to be carried out carefully to ensure
that work product samples are representative, comprehensive, and provide
evidence of the implemented process.
工作产品的选择必须仔细执行，以确保工作产品样本是有代表性的、全面
的，并提供实现过程的证据。
2.6.4.1 Selection of work product samples

2.6.4.2 工作产品样本的选择
The following aspects apply for the selection of work products:

以下方面适用于工作产品的选择:
 Coverage of the most important functions, which are relevant for the
assessment scope
 涵盖与评估范围相关的最重要的职能
 Coverage of new functionality, adapted functionality, reused software
and platform software according to the assessment scope
 根据评估范围，涵盖新功能、改编功能、重用软件和平台软件
 Coverage of the whole spectrum of ASIL levels applied within the as-
sessment scope
 覆盖评估范围内应用的整个 ASIL 等级范围
 Coverage of manual coding (all programming languages used) and
model based development (all modeling tools used), where applicable
 覆盖手动编码(使用所有编程语言)和基于模型的开发(使用所有建模工
具)，如果适用的话
Metrics (e.g. number of requirements, cyclomatic complexity, lines of code,
number of change requests) can support the selection of work product
samples. It can be useful to select units with different complexity to sample
the corresponding detailed designs.
度量标准(例如，需求的数量、圈复杂度、代码行数、变更请求的数量 )可以
支持工作产品样本的选择。选择具有不同复杂性的单元来对相应的详细设计
进行采样可能是有用的。

月 21 日

For the engineering processes (SYS.x, SWE.x) the following approach is
recommended: The assessor chooses stakeholder requirements based on
above-mentioned aspects. The work products selected for evaluating the
indicators of the processes should mark a clear path through the engineer-
ing life cycle. The same approach should be applied when evaluating sup-
porting processes such as change management or problem management.
对于工程流程(SYS.x，SWE.x ),建议采用以下方法:评估员根据上述方面选
择利益相关方的要求。为评估过程指标而选择的工作产品应该在工程生命周
期中标出一条清晰的路径。在评估支持过程 (如变更管理或问题管理)时，应
采用相同的方法。
Although the assessed organization may propose certain work products, it
remains the assessor’s decision to which extent these work products are
considered for the process attribute.
尽管被评估的组织可能会提出某些工作产品，但是评估者仍然可以决定这些
工作产品在多大程度上被考虑到过程属性中。
2.6.4.3 Plausibility checks of work product samples

2.6.4.4 工作产品样本的合理性检查
All documents used as candidate for objective evidence have to be
checked for consistency, in terms of plausibility of the last change time
stamp and appropriateness of the change history. The latter can be easily
checked by inspecting the history of the work product in the respective tool
which is used for configuration or document management. If a document
has been initially generated shortly before the assessment it should not be
considered for the rating of the process attribute in question unless there is
a plausible reason for the late documentation.
必须检查所有用作客观证据的候选文件的一致性，包括最后变更时间戳的合
理性和变更历史的适当性。通过在用于配置或文档管理的相应工具中检查工
作产品的历史，可以很容易地检查后者。如果文件最初是在评估前不久生成
的，则不应考虑对有问题的流程属性进行评级，除非文件迟交有合理的原
因。
The history of the work product should show an appropriate life cycle and a
number of versions which correlates with the update cycle of the respective
work product.
工作产品的历史应该显示一个适当的生命周期和许多版本，这些版本与各自
工作产品的更新周期相关。
For instance, it could be expected that if a schedule should be updated on
a weekly basis there is at least one version per week (or some evidence
that an update was not necessary). Technical documents tend to have
more versions than plans. However, if the architecture is based on a plat-
form, there may not be that many versions. It is up to the assessors to
check whether the number of versions reflects appropriately the life cycle
and status of the project and fulfills the purpose of the process attribute
which is assessed.
例如，可以预期，如果一个时间表应该每周更新，那么每周至少有一个版本
(或者有证据表明更新是不必要的)。技术文档往往比计划有更多的版本。然
而，如果架构是基于一个平台的，可能不会有那么多版本。由评审员来检查
版本的数量是否恰当地反映了项目的生命周期和状态，并实现了被评审的过
程属性的目的。


2.6.4.5 Content-related examination
2.6.4.6 内容相关考试
The content-related examination of the work products should always cover
the whole scope of the assessment.
工作产品的内容相关检查应该总是覆盖评估的整个范围。
This means based on the criteria for the selection of the work products
samples the whole scope shall be represented.
这意味着基于工作产品样本的选择标准，整个范围都应被代表。
In the limited time it is not possible to cover all aspects of the project. Nev-
ertheless, the samples shall also be checked regarding the right content.
For the content of work products, the work product characteristics can be
used as guidelines.
在有限的时间内，不可能涵盖项目的所有方面。尽管如此，还应检查样品的
含量是否正确。对于工作产品的内容，工作产品的特性可以作为指导方针。
The system requirements for example are not only to be checked to deter-
mine whether there are linked stakeholder requirements but also if the sys-
tem requirements reflect the intention of the stakeholder requirements. An-
other example would be to check the unit tests against the detailed design.
The engineer should explain the detailed design. The unit tests are then
checked against the detailed design. Inconsistencies found between the
test cases and the explanation of the detailed design shall be considered
when rating the process attributes.
例如，不仅要检查系统需求以确定是否有相关的涉众需求，还要检查系统需
求是否反映了涉众需求的意图。另一个例子是对照详细设计检查单元测试。
工程师应该解释详细的设计。然后对照详细设计检查单元测试。在评定过程
属性时，应考虑测试案例和详细设计说明之间的不一致。
Automotive SPICE shall not be mistaken for a checklist. The assessor has
the duty to check appropriate instantiation of documentation to cover the
different process attributes. Appropriateness is based on e.g. the scope,
the size and complexity of the project team (e.g. distributed development),
the size and complexity of the product, the timeline, and other influencing
factors as defined in the process context.
汽车 SPICE 不应被误认为清单。评估员有责任检查文件的适当实例，以涵盖
不同的过程属性。适当性基于例如项目团队的范围、规模和复杂性(例如分
布式开发)、产品的规模和复杂性、时间表以及过程上下文中定义的其他影
响因素。

第 23 次会议

2.6.5 Aggregation of process attribute ratings
2.6.6 流程属性评级的汇总
It is recommended to use the rating method R2 from ISO/IEC 33020 for the
rating of each process attribute.
建议使用 ISO/IEC 33020 的 R2 评级法对每个流程属性进行评级。

This means,
这意味着，
1) firstly, to rate each process attribute for each process within the scope
of the assessment for each process instance;
2) 首先，在每个过程实例的评估范围内对每个过程的每个过程属性进行评
级；
3) and secondly, aggregating the process attribute ratings of the process
instances.
4) 其次，聚合过程实例的过程属性等级。
An aggregation of the process attribute ratings of all process instances is
mandatory. This means, in the assessment report there will be one addi-
tional set of process attribute ratings for the aggregation.
所有流程实例的流程属性评级的汇总是强制性的。这意味着，在评估报告
中，将有一个额外的集合的过程属性评级。
The aggregation is done according to the following schema (“one dimen-
sional aggregation using arithmetic mean” according to ISO/IEC 33020):
根据以下方案进行聚合(根据 ISO/IEC 33020 的“使用算术平均值的一维聚
合”):
1) Firstly, in accordance with ISO/IEC 33020 NPLF rating values can be
expressed as interval values as follows:
2) 首先，根据 ISO/IEC 33020，NPLF 额定值可表示为如下区间值:
N  0; P  1; L  2; F  3
n0；P1；L2；F3
with rounding the result to the nearest integer (by rounding up or
down), and converting the result back to the corresponding ordinal
rating. Rounding rules are: rounding down to the nearest integer when
the average value is less than the midpoint between consecutive
integers; rounding up if the average value is at or above the midpoint
between consecutive integers.
将结果舍入到最接近的整数(通过向上或向下舍入)，并将结果转换回相
应的序数评定。舍入规则是:当平均值小于连续整数之间的中点时，向
下舍入到最接近的整数；如果平均值等于或高于连续整数的中点，则向
上舍入。
3) Secondly, the aggregation can be done
4) 其次，可以进行聚合
a. by calculating an arithmetic mean, or
b. 通过计算算术平均值，或
c. by assigning these internal values a percentage weighting first,
and then converted back to the ordinal NPLF rating scale.
Weightings and their rationale must be explained in the assess-
ment report, and may depend on e.g.
d. 通过先给这些内部值分配一个百分比权重，然后转换回序数 NPLF
评定量表。权重及其基本原理必须在评估报告中解释，并且可能取
决于例如
- size of personnel of organizational unit/ sub-project
- 组织单位/子项目的人员规模
- strategic significance of the product, e.g. commodity vs. new
innovative products
- 产品的战略意义，例如商品与新的创新产品
- contribution to the revenue in %
- 对收入的贡献百分比
- criticality of product parts, e.g. a risk class according to ISO
26262
- 产品部件的关键程度，例如根据 ISO 26262 的风险等级

Process Process Process
instance instance instance Aggregated rating
A B C
(2+2+3) / 3
L (2) L (2) F (3)  L (2.33)
2a. Arithmetic mean

(1+2+3) / 3
without any weighting of P (1) L (2) F (3)  L (2)
process instances
(0+1+3) / 3
N (0) P (1) F (3)  P (1.33)
L (2) L (2) F (3) (2*0.7+2*0.15+3*0.15)

70% 15% 15%  L (2.15)
2b. Arithmetic mean P (1) L (2) F (3) (1*0.7+2*0.2+3*0.1)

with weighting 70% 20% 10%  P (1.4)
N (0) P (1) F (3) (0*0.3+1*0.2+3*0.5)

30% 20% 50%  L (1.7)
流程实流程实流程实

例例例综合评级
A B C
(2+2+3) / 3
第二卷第二卷女(3) L (2.33)
2a。没有任何流程实例
(1+2+3) / 3
加权的算术平均值 P (1) 第二卷女(3) L (2)
(0+1+3) / 3
N (0) P (1) 女(3) P (1.33)
第二卷第二卷女(3) (2*0.7+2*0.15+3*0.15

70% 15% 15% )
L (2.15)
2b。加权算术平均 P (1) 第二卷女(3) (1*0.7+2*0.2+3*0.1)
数 70% 20% 10% P (1.4)
N (0) P (1) 女(3) (0*0.3+1*0.2+3*0.5)

30% 20% 50% L (1.7)
Each row represents a process as defined in the assessment scope.

每行代表评估范围中定义的一个过程。
2.7 Application of rating rules and recommendations
2.8 评级规则和建议的应用
2.8.1 Objective
2.8.2 目标
In chapter 1 to 5 of this document, rules and recommendations are
provided. They are intended to reduce the spread of rating decisions for the
same specific process attributes or indicators in terms of interpretation,
dependencies and consistency. This is seen as one of the key factors by
the authors of this publication to improve the quality and reproducibility of
assessment results.
在本文件的第 1 至 5 章中，提供了规则和建议。它们旨在从解释、依赖性和
一致性方面，减少相同特定过程属性或指标的评级决策的扩散。本出版物的
作者认为这是提高评估结果质量和重现性的关键因素之一。
Due to the different impact an identified weakness may have on the capa-
bility of an assessed process, a differentiation between rules and recom-
mendations with different levels of rigor has been established:
由于已识别的缺陷可能对被评估过程的能力产生不同的影响，已经建立了不
同严格程度的规则和建议之间的区别:

2010 年 5 月 25 日

2.8.2.1 Rules
2.8.2.2 规则
Looking at the formal definition of the term “Rule” taken from Oxford dic-
tionaries [Oxford], the following explanation is provided:
查看取自 Oxford dic- tionaries [Oxford]的术语“规则”的正式定义，提

供以下解释:
“One of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing
conduct or procedure within a particular area of activity.”
"在某一特定活动领域中管理行为或程序的一套明确的或被理解的规则或
原则之一。"
A lot of assessments need a specific analysis of the current situation and
context, in which the project operates. Each rating requires the assessors’
knowledge to consider the specific circumstances when rating process at-
tributes. That means, exceptions from rules might be necessary to provide
an objective and adequate rating. With respect to the formal definition
above, “governing conduct or procedure” shall not be interpreted in terms
of a strict and rigorous regulation which shall be followed under all circum-
stances. The aim of a rule is to provide rating principles, which are valid in
the majority of assessment situations.
许多评估需要对项目运作的现状和背景进行具体分析。每次评级都需要评估
者的知识，以便在评级过程中考虑具体情况。这意味着，规则的例外可能是
必要的，以提供客观和充分的评级。关于上面的正式定义，“管理行为或程
序”不应被解释为在所有情况下都应遵守的严格规定。规则的目的是提供评
级原则，这在大多数评估情况下都是有效的。
Therefore, in terms of rating in an assessment a rule sometimes might be
infringed. In this case a justification shall be documented, which describes
why the assessor did not follow the specific rule when rating a specific pro-
cess attribute or indicator. The documented list of infringed rules and corre-
sponding justifications shall be communicated to the assessment sponsor.
因此，就评估中的评级而言，规则有时可能被违反。在这种情况下，应记录
理由，说明为什么评估员在评定特定工艺属性或指标时没有遵循特定规则。
违反规则的记录清单和相应的理由应传达给评估发起人。
The activity on documenting deviations from rules is provided in chapter
记录规则偏差的活动在第章中提供
6.4.2.3 “Consolidation”.
6.4.2.3“整顿”。
1.4.1.2 Recommendations
1.4.1.3 推荐
The formal definition of the term “Recommendation” from Oxford dictionar-
ies [Oxford] is as following:
牛津词典对“推荐”一词的正式定义如下:
“A suggestion or proposal as to the best course of action, especially one
put forward by an authoritative body.”
"对最佳行动方案的建议或提议，尤指由权威机构提出的。"
The aim of giving rating recommendations is to provide proposals for best
course of actions as stated in this formal definition. In an assessment the
assessor may consider a recommendation or may not, depending on his
objective judgment whether the recommendation is applicable in the con-
text of the rating decision. Nevertheless, also recommendations should
provide the best approach in the majority of assessment situations. So an
给出评级建议的目的是提供本正式定义中所述的最佳行动方案。在评估中，
评估员可以考虑或不考虑某项建议，这取决于他对该建议是否适用于评级决
定的客观判断。然而，在大多数评估情况下，建议也应提供最佳方法。所以
安

assessor should normally follow this recommendation, but if he does not,
there is no need to document it.
评估员通常应遵循这一建议，但如果他不这样做，就没有必要记录下来。
The differentiation of recommendation from rules has been made by the
authors of this publication based on the expected impact of the respective
indicator and based on the analysis of typical incorrect ratings and root
causes for differing assessment results which have occurred in the past.
本出版物的作者根据各自指标的预期影响，并根据对过去发生的不同评估结
果的典型错误评级和根本原因的分析，对建议和规则进行了区分。
1.4.1.4 Accumulation of rating rules and recommendations

1.4.1.5 评级规则和建议的累积
There might be cases in which for one process attribute or indicator rating
different rules and/or recommendations apply in parallel. If for instance two
different rules are requiring a downrating of at least one step, there should
be no automatism to downrate at least by two steps if applying both rules. It
is the task of the assessor to decide, whether the specific weaknesses
found in the assessment requires an accumulation of the rules or not.
对于一个过程属性或指标评级，可能会有不同的规则和/或建议同时适用的
情况。例如，如果两个不同的规则要求至少降级一级，那么在应用两个规则
的情况下，不应该自动降级至少两级。评估员的任务是决定在评估中发现的
具体弱点是否需要规则的积累。
2.8.3 Terminology
2.8.4 术语
For the formulation of rules and recommendations a defined terminology is
used in this document. An overview of used terminology and an additional
explanation is given in the following table, if applicable:
为了制定规则和建议，本文件中使用了定义的术语。下表给出了所用术语的
概述和附加解释(如果适用):

2007 年 5 月 27 日

2.8.4.1 Rules [RL]
2.8.4.2 规则[RL]
Wording Explanation
1 If …, PAx.y must not be rated F. Any rating other than F might be chosen,
If …, the indicator … must not be rated F. depending on the impact of the detected
weakness.
2 If ..., the indicator … must not be rated -

higher than N / P / L.
3 If …, the indicator … must not be down- The found issue shall not lead to a down-
rated. rating.
4 If ..., the indicator … shall be downrated. The indicator(s) shall be downrated for at
If ..., the corresponding indicators … shall least one step of the rating scale. It is the
be downrated. decision of the assessor, if a further down-
rating is necessary to reflect the identified
weakness.
5 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N / See Rule 2. This rule is used to ensure
P / L, the indicator B must not be rated consistency within the rating.
higher.
6 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N / See Rule 4. This rule is used to ensure
P / L, the indicator B shall be downrated. consistency within the rating.
7 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N / See Rule 6, in case a specific aspect of in-
P / L due to …, the indicator B shall be dicator A was the root cause for its down-
downrated. rating.
8 If ..., this must not be used to downrate the See Rule 3, in case a specific aspect shall
… indicator …. be excluded as a root cause for downrat-
ing.
讲话说明
一如果…，PAx.y 不得评为 f 级。根据检测到的弱点的影响，可以选择除 F

如果…指示器…不得被评为 f 级。以外的任何评级。
2 如果...，指示器…的额定值不得高于 -
N / P / L。
3 如果…，则指标…不得下调。发现的问题不应导致降级。

四如果...，指示器…应降低额定值。如指示器的等级应至少降低一级。如果有必
果...，相应的指示器…将被降级。要进一步降低评级以反映已确定的弱点，
则由评估员决定。
5 如果...指示器 A 是降级/额定 N / P / L，参见规则 2。此规则用于确保评级的一

指示器 B 的额定不得更高。致性。
6 如果...指示器 A 降级/额定 N / P / L，指参见规则 4。此规则用于确保评级的一

示器 B 应降级。致性。
七如果...由于…，指标 A 被降级/N/P/L，指如果指标 A 的某个特定方面是其评级下调的

标 B 应被降级。根本原因，请参见规则 6。
8 如果...，这不得用于降低如果某个特定方面被排除在降级的根本原
…指示器… 因之外，请参见规则 3。
In general, the term “downrate” means that the initial rating of the indica-
tor(s) without applying the rule shall be reduced. The degree of downrating
depends on the significance and number of identified weaknesses.
一般来说，术语“降级”是指在不应用规则的情况下，指示器的初始等级应
降低。降级的程度取决于已识别缺陷的重要性和数量。


2.8.4.3 Recommendations [RC]
2.8.4.4 建议[RC]
Wording Explanation
1 If ..., the indicator … should not be rated F. A rating other than F should be chosen,
depending on the impact of the detected
weakness.
2 If ..., the indicator … should not be rated -

higher than N / P / L.
3 If ..., the indicator … should not be down- The found issue should not lead to a down-
rated. rating.
4 If ..., the indicator … should be downrated. The indicator should be downrated for at
least one step of the rating scale.
5 If ..., this should not be used to downrate See Recommendation 3, in case a specific
the … indicator …. aspect should be excluded as a root
cause for downrating.
6 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N / See Recommendation 2. This recommen-

P / L, the indicator B should not be rated dation is used to support consistency
higher. within the rating.
7 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N See Recommendation 4. This recommen-

/ P / L, the indicator B should be dation is used to support consistency
downrated. within the rating.
8 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N See Recommendation 7, in case a specific

/ P / L due to …, the indicator B should be aspect of indicator A was the root cause
downrated. for its downrating.
9 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N This rule is used to support consistency
/ P / L, it should have no influence on … within the rating.
10 If ... the indicator A is downrated / rated N / “To be inline” does not mean that the rat-
P / L due to ..., this should be in line with ings should be the same. It should be
the rating of the indicator … checked, whether both ratings have been
performed based on the same insight. This
is especially related to the findings ob-
tained during the assessment.
Ratings which differ by more than one
step of the rating scale might be an
indicator of inconsistency.
讲话说明

一如果...，指标…不应被评为 f 级。根据检测到的缺陷的影响，应选择 F 以外的
评级。
2 如果...，指标…的评级不应高于 N / -
P / L。
3 如果...，指标……不应被降级。发现的问题不应导致评级下调。
四如果...，指标…应该降级。该指标应至少降一级。
5 如果...，这不应该用来降低…指标… 参见建议 3，以防某个特定方面被排除在降

级的根本原因之外。
6 如果...指示器 A 被降级/额定 N / P / L，见建议 2。该建议用于支持评级的一致性。

指示器 B 不应被定级更高。
七如果...指示器 A 降级/额定 N / P / L，指见建议 4。该建议用于支持评级的一致性。

示器 B 应降级。
8 如果...由于…，指标 A 被降级/N/P/L，指见建议 7，如果指标 A 的某个具体方面是其

标 B 应被降级。降级的根本原因。
9 如果...指示器 A 是降级/额定 N / P / L，此规则用于支持评级的一致性。

它应该对…没有影响
10 如果...指标 A 降级/额定 N / P / L 的原因 “内联”并不意味着评级应该相同。应检查

是...，这应该符合指标的评级… 两次评级是否基于相同的见解。这与评估期
间获得的结果尤其相关。
评分等级相差一级以上可能是不一致的表
现。

2010 年 5 月 29 日

2.8.5 Consistency of process attribute rating
2.8.6 流程属性评级的一致性
In each part of the rating guidelines in chapter 3 to 5, specific chapters for
assuring the consistency of the process attribute ratings are provided. The
aim of these chapters is to describe and visualize the relations which are
explicitly and implicitly contained in the Automotive SPICE process as-
sessment model and give appropriate rules and recommendations to ad-
dress the dependencies. It is not the aim of these guidelines to cover all
dependencies that exists in the complete set of the Automotive SPICE
PAM processes for each capability level of the measurement framework.
The given rules and recommendations are restricted to
在第 3 章到第 5 章的评级指南的每一部分中，提供了确保过程属性评级一致
性的具体章节。这些章节的目的是描述和可视化汽车 SPICE 流程评估模型中
显式和隐式包含的关系，并给出适当的规则和建议来解决依赖性。这些指南
的目的并不是要涵盖汽车 SPICE PAM 流程中针对测量框架的每个能力级别的
所有依赖关系。给定的规则和建议仅限于
 the dependencies having significant impact on the process attribute
rating and those which are not obvious;
 对过程属性评级有重大影响的依赖关系和不明显的依赖关系；
 the processes of the VDA scope; and
 VDA 范围的过程；和
 the capability levels 1 to 3.
 能力等级 1 到 3。
The processes described in the Automotive SPICE PAM are intended to
cover self-contained topics like project management or system require-
ments analysis, which can be rated individually on the defined capability
scale.
Automotive SPICE PAM 中描述的过程旨在涵盖独立的主题，如项目管理或系

统需求分析，这些主题可以根据定义的能力等级进行单独评级。
On the one hand base practices are applicable to a specific process. As the
input to a base practice for a specific process may be produced by another
base practice of the same process or a base practice of another process
there are relations and dependencies within and between processes.
一方面，基础实践适用于特定的过程。由于特定过程的基本实践的输入可能
由同一过程的另一个基本实践或另一个过程的基本实践产生，因此在过程内
部和过程之间存在关系和依赖性。
On the other hand, there are generic practices, which are applicable to all
assessed processes. There are dependencies of generic practices within
the same capability level or between different levels and between generic
practices on a specific capability level to level 1 base practices for connect-
ed processes.
另一方面，有一些通用的实践，适用于所有被评估的过程。同一能力级别内
或不同级别之间以及特定能力级别上的一般实践与相关流程的 1 级基本实践
之间存在相关性。
The following types of dependencies have been identified:
已经确定了以下类型的依赖关系:
30 个月

Explicit dependencies:
显式依赖关系:
A Dependencies between base practices within one specific process in-
dicated in the PAM by a specific wording, e.g.:
B 在 PAM 中用特定的措辞表示的一个特定流程内基本实践之间的依赖性，
例如:
SWE.6.BP4: Test integrated software ↔ SWE.6.BP3: Select test
cases: “Test the integrated software using the selected test cases”.
SWE.6.BP4:测试集成软件↔ SWE.6.BP3:选择测试用例:“使用选择的测
试用例测试集成软件”。
C Dependencies between base practices of one process to base prac-
tices / process attribute of another process indicated in the PAM by a
specific wording, e.g.:
D 一个流程的基本实践与另一个流程的基本实践/流程属性之间的依赖关
系在 PAM 中用特定的措辞表示，例如:
SWE.6.BP5: Establish bidirectional traceability ↔ SWE.1.BP1: Specify
software requirements:
SWE.6.BP5:建立双向可追溯性↔ SWE.1.BP1:指定软件需求:
“Establish bidirectional traceability between software requirements
and test cases included in the software qualification test specification”
“在软件鉴定测试规范中包含的软件需求和测试用例之间建立双向可追
溯性”
E Dependencies between generic practices of a defined capability level
indicated in the PAM by a specific wording, e.g.:
F PAM 中以特定措辞表示的已定义能力水平的一般实践之间的依赖性，例
如:
GP 2.1.3: Monitor the performance of the process against the plans ↔
GP 2.1.2: Plan the performance of the process:
GP 2.1.3:对照计划监控流程的绩效↔ GP 2.1.2:计划流程的绩效:
“The process is performed according to the plan(s). Process perfor-
mance is monitored …”
“流程是根据计划执行的。监控过程性能……”
Implicit dependencies:

隐式依赖关系:
G Dependencies between generic practices of a defined capability level
and specific connected processes, e.g.:
H 已定义能力水平的一般实践与特定相关流程之间的依赖性，例如:
The general practices for the PA2.1 “Performance Management” are
strongly linked to the MAN.3 process “Project Management”.
PA2.1“绩效管理”的一般实践与 MAN.3 流程“项目管理”紧密相关。
I Dependencies related to the logical process workflow within one pro-
cess and related to the quality of the input to a specific base practice,
e.g.:
J 与一个流程中的逻辑流程工作流相关的依赖性，以及与特定基本实践的
输入质量相关的依赖性，例如:
Following a strategy requires the strategy to be available, meaningful
and in a sufficient quality.
遵循一项战略要求该战略是可用的、有意义的和有足够质量的。
K Dependencies related to the logical workflow between processes and
related to the quality of the input to a specific base practice, e.g.:
L 与流程之间的逻辑工作流程以及特定基础实践的输入质量相关的依赖
性，例如:
Elaborating test cases in a software test specification requires the
linked requirements to be documented with a sufficient level of quality.
在软件测试规范中阐述测试用例需要以足够高的质量水平记录相关的需
求。

月 31 日

M Dependencies related to the logical workflow between processes and
related to the quantity of the input necessary to achieve a specific pro-
cess purpose e.g.:
N 与流程之间的逻辑工作流程相关的依赖性，以及与实现特定流程目的所
需的输入量相关的依赖性，例如:
Testing the software requires the software requirements to be availa-
ble in a sufficient volume.
测试软件需要足够数量的软件需求。
As dependencies of type A and C are explicitly contained in the PAM, they
have to be considered when rating the processes, the process outcomes or
the corresponding indicators with respect to a specific capability level.
由于 A 类和 C 类依赖关系明确包含在 PAM 中，因此在对过程、过程结果或与
特定能力水平相关的相应指标进行评级时，必须考虑它们。
Dependencies of type B and D are caused by relations in the PAM crossing
the boundary of a specific process or capability level.
类型 B 和 D 的依赖性是由跨越特定过程或能力级别边界的 PAM 中的关系引起
的。
In terms of rating consistency of each process attribute rating, the identified
dependencies between indicators are addressed by a corresponding rule or
recommendation depending on its impact on the process attribute rating.
就每个过程属性评级的评级一致性而言，根据其对过程属性评级的影响，通
过相应的规则或建议来解决所识别的指标之间的依赖性。
In case of type E and F dependencies, the rating of an indicator requires a
certain quality of an input from a specific base practice. This means, if the
delivering process is not capable of delivering its output or parts of it (e.g.
the output is not complete or has low quality), then it seems likely that the
receiving process is not capable of producing those parts of the intended
output which are based on the output of the delivering process.
在 E 类和 F 类依赖性的情况下，指标的评级需要来自特定基础实践的输入的
一定质量。这意味着，如果交付流程无法交付其输出或部分输出(例如，输
出不完整或质量低)，那么接收流程似乎很可能无法产生基于交付流程输出
的预期输出部分。
In fact, the receiving process might have compensated the weakness of the
delivering process. As a consequence, for these dependencies only rating
recommendations have been provided in the following generic wording:
事实上，接收过程可能弥补了交付过程的不足。因此，对于这些依赖关系，
仅以下列通用措辞提供评级建议:
“[XXX.RCy] If the indicator BPn of process X is downrated, this should be
in line with the rating of the indicator BPm of process Y.”
“[XXX。RCy]如果流程 X 的指标 BPn 被降级，这应该与流程 y 的指标 BPm 的
评级一致。”
In case of dependencies of type G, the rating of an indicator requires a cer-
tain quantity of an input from a specific base practice. The links for the cor-
responding relation can be obtained from the given diagrams. The depend-
encies themselves are only addressed by the rules considering the scope
of the assessment as described in chapter 1.2, “Assessment Scope”.
在 G 类依赖性的情况下，指标的评级需要来自特定基础实践的一定数量的输
入。对应关系的链接可以从给定的图表中获得。从属关系本身仅由考虑第
1.2 章“评估范围”所述评估范围的规则处理。
To illustrate relevant dependencies of type A to F and their consideration in
the rules and recommendations specific diagrams are provided in the rating
consistency chapters of chapter 3 to 5.
为了说明 A 到 F 类型的相关依赖性及其在规则和建议中的考虑，在第 3 章到
第 5 章的评级一致性章节中提供了具体的图表。


In these diagrams in-process (A,E) or in-level (C) dependencies are indi-
cated by solid blue arrows for those resulting in a rule and dashed blue ar-
rows for those resulting in a recommendation:
在这些图中，进程内(A，E)或级别内(C)的依赖关系由蓝色实线箭头表示，
表示产生规则的依赖关系，由蓝色虚线箭头表示产生建议的依赖关系:
BP BP GP GP
Rules:
BP BP GP GP
规则:
BP BP GP GP
Recommendations:
BP BP GP GP
建议:
Out-of-process (B,F) or out-of-level (D) dependencies are indicated by solid

(rule) and dashed (recommendation) green arrows:
进程外(B，F)或级别外(D)依赖关系由实线(规则)和虚线(建议)绿色箭头表
示:
BP BP/PA GP BP/GP
Rules:
BP BP/PA GP BP/GP
规则:
BP BP/PA GP BP/GP
Recommendations:
BP BP/PA GP BP/GP
建议:
In case a blue target box is shown, the dependency is located within the
same process or capability level. A green box represents a target indicator
which is located outside the rated process or capability level.
如果显示蓝色目标框，则依赖关系位于相同的过程或能力级别中。绿色方框
代表位于额定流程或能力水平之外的目标指标。

第 33 期

Agenglish 1-45

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agenglish 1-45

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Joint Quality

Joint QualityManagement in the

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für Yanfeng US Automotive bestimmt.

Process assessment using Automotive SPICE in the

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)

Printed on chlorine-free bleached paper

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom I

I Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

I Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom I

Terms and glossary 1

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom V

Terms and glossary 1

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom V

VI Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

Assessment log The formal documentation of the execution of an assessment drawn

Assessment Individual or entity, internal or external to the organizational unit being

Assessor Individual who participates in the rating of process attributes.

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

AUTOSAR AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture: an initiative by the automo-

Process capability A characterization of the ability of a process to meet current or project-

Evidence Artifact or information reflecting practice performance. Evidence are

Findings The evaluations documented by assessors regarding strengths and po-

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

HIS “HerstellerInitiative Software” (Manufacturer Initiative Software):Different

Indicator Sources of objective evidence used to support the assessor’s judgment

ISO/IEC330xxseries The set of International Standards ISO/IEC 33001:2015, ISO/IEC

Lead Assessor who has demonstrated the competencies to conduct an as-

Process measure- Schema for use in characterizing a process quality characteristic of an

NDA Non-Disclosure Agreement

OEM “Original Equipment Manufacturer”. In the automotive industry this

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

他的过程范围 汽车 SPICE 的一套精选流程，在 HIS 中代表的汽车制造商进行的每次评

ISO/iec 330 xx 系列 国际标准 ISO/IEC 33001:2015、ISO/IEC 33099 定义了过程评估所需的

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom 3

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

Process reference Model comprising definitions of processes in a domain of application

Process (capability) Set of process attribute ratings for an assessed process

Process quality Measurable aspect of process quality; category of process

SPICE Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination

VDA “Verband der Automobilindustrie”, the German association of Auto-

VDA process scope Standard set of processes to be considered in the Automotive

VDA-QMC Internetportal am 09.06.2021 um

第 1 层…n 术语“第 1 层…n 层”是指供应链中不同层次的供应商。OEM 的直接供应

VDA 进程范围 汽车领域要考虑的标准流程集。

他的过程范围汽车 SPICE 的一套精选流程，在 HIS 中代表的汽车制造商进行的每次评

ISO/iec 330 xx 系列国际标准 ISO/IEC 33001:2015、ISO/IEC 33099 定义了过程评估所需的

VDA 进程范围汽车领域要考虑的标准流程集。

在汽车 SPICE 开发之初， ISO/IEC 12207:2008 汽车特别兴趣小组 (Au-